What are the different donor policy approaches to working with non-state actors? What lessons emerge from other donors’ work?
What are the different donor policy approaches to working with non-state actors in security and justice? (Refer to the differences and similarities with DFID’s approach). What lessons emerge from other donors’ work?
DFID has a rule of law policy approach. Programming decisions are made by a context-based, problem solving approach and therefore the policy does not identify overarching actors or themes for engagement. Is one of few donors to have published a briefing (DFID, 2004) entirely focussed on engaging with non-state security and justice actors. Engaging with non-state actors is also emphasised in the most recent policy document (DFID, 2013) and on the website.
UNDP takes a human-rights based justice sector reform approach focuses on strengthening formal and informal justice system, especially for the poor and marginalised. It has published guidelines with a section focussing on non-state actors (UNDP, 2006), and a report analysing lessons (Wojkowska, 2006).
USAID’s rule of law programmes work with non-state justice institutions to improve access to justice, and seek to strengthen legitimacy by harmonising non-state customary or religious law with state-based body of law. A summary of an unpublished USAID guidance note focussing on non-state actors is available online (Pavlovich in Mcloughlin, 2009).
Herbert, S. Policy approaches and lessons from working with non-state actors in security and justice (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report 1190). Governance and Social Development Resource Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK (2015) 11 pp.